Freeborn v. Badgley
Opinion of the Court
Appeal from a judgment of nonsuit and costs, $16.17, rendered in favor of the defendant by F. L. Maine, justice of the-peace, May 31, 1895. The return made by the justice in relation, to the adjournment is as follows: “Adjourned by consent to-May 31, 1895, at 9 o’clock a. m.” At which time judgment ivasrendered as above, without waiting one hour, which is claimed by the plaintiff and appellant to have been error.
An order for a new trial which had been made in this case places the parties in exactly the same position as upon the return of a summons. It brings them into court,- and “thereupon the like proceedings must be had in the action as upon the return of a summons personally served.” Code Civ. Proc. § 3065. If the parties-made an agreement upon the return day that the ordinary practice of waiting an hour before moving the case should not apply,, it should either have been reduced to writing and made part of the justice’s return, or it should have been made to appear in the return itself. There is nothing in the return above, as quoted, to-indicate other than the ordinary adjournment. This is also true as to any proceedings which took place before the justice on the
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.